Tell the Truth

Let me trace the timeline here because nobody's connecting it. Step 1: Scrape the entire internet. Every book, every article, every conversation, every piece of art, every forum post. Do it without asking. Do it without paying. Step 2: Train a model on all of it. Call it "artificial intelligence." Step 3: Go to BlackRock's Infrastructure Summit and announce: "We see a future where intelligence is a utility, like electricity or water, and people buy it from us on a meter." Step 3 is where you sell people's own knowledge back to them. On a meter. They took the collective output of human thought, compressed it into a model, and now they want to charge you by the token to access a version of what you and everyone you know already created. One Reddit user put it perfectly: "They stole all this data from us, the people, our life's work, creativity, art, by devouring the internet and blowing through all copyright laws. Now they want to sell it back to us in the form of a utility." Imagine if someone photocopied every book in the public library, burned the library down, and then opened a subscription service for the copies. That's the metered intelligence business model. And they're pitching it to infrastructure investors as though they invented water.

Professor Robert Clancy draws attention to a shocking new Japanese study involving 20 million people, which found that "all the excess deaths were in the vaccinated group". "The non-vaccinated group had none."

A gene therapy given to a 13-month-old boy has, years later, led to a tumor in his brain after the virus carrying the gene inserted part of it directly into his DNA, researchers report. The mass was safely removed, but his case appears to be the first time a gene therapy delivered directly into the body has been linked to cancer. Learn more: scim.ag/49vonz8

BREAKING: LANDMARK PEER-REVIEWED STUDY FINDS VACCINATION IS A MAJOR RISK FACTOR FOR AUTISM We found 79% of studies evaluating vaccines or their components (107 of 136) reported evidence consistent with a vaccine–autism link. After DECADES of censorship and denial, our 50-page analysis of more than 300 studies provides one of the most comprehensive syntheses to date on the possible causes of autism. The paper is now officially PEER-REVIEWED and PUBLISHED in the Journal of Independent Medicine. Autism’s rise is multifactorial—but routine childhood vaccination emerged as a MAJOR modifiable risk factor within the broader causal framework. We found potential determinants of new-onset autism before age 9 to include: 👵 Older parents (>35 years mother, >40 years father) 👶 Premature delivery (<37 weeks) 🧬 Common genetic variants 🧩 Siblings with autism 🔥 Maternal immune activation 💊 In utero drug exposure ☣️ Environmental toxicants 🦠 Gut–brain axis alterations 💉 Combination routine childhood vaccination Of 136 studies evaluating vaccines or their components: ➡️ 107 (79%) found evidence consistent with a vaccine–autism link ➡️ 29 reported “no association,” yet lacked unvaccinated controls and were riddled with major flaws ➡️ 12 studies comparing fully vaccinated vs. completely unvaccinated children found every time that the unvaccinated had superior overall health outcomes and substantially lower autism risk Biologic mechanisms converged on shared pathways—including immune dysregulation, mitochondrial dysfunction, and neuroinflammation—triggered by clustered and early-timed vaccination during critical windows of brain development. By evaluating all known risk factors side by side, this analysis uniquely clarifies the relative contribution of vaccination compared to genetic and environmental domains. No prior review has attempted this integrative scope without excluding positive vaccine-association studies or unvaccinated controls—an essential step in determining whether vaccines truly play a role in autism risk, and if so, how significant that role may be within the broader causal landscape. This publication represents a major breakthrough through the longstanding censorship imposed by the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex on the issue of vaccination and autism. It also marks Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s first major return to the peer-reviewed scientific literature in years—after enduring decades of attacks from the vaccine cartel. CONCLUSION: The totality of evidence supports a multifactorial model of ASD in which genetic predisposition, neuroimmune biology, environmental toxicants, perinatal stressors, and iatrogenic exposures converge to produce the phenotype of a post-encephalitic state. Combination and early-timed routine childhood vaccination represents a significant modifiable risk factor for ASD within a broader multifactorial framework, supported by convergent mechanistic, clinical, and epidemiologic findings, and characterized by intensified use, the clustering of multiple doses during critical neurodevelopmental windows, and the lack of research on the cumulative safety of the full pediatric schedule. @McCulloughFund @P_McCulloughMD @DrAndyWakefield @Honest_Medicine @CPriceRogers @KirstinCosgrove @NathanMeadPhD @BreCraven_PA @MilaLRad

He accomplished two important things with this line of questioning: 1) He exposed abortion for what it really is, stripping away the euphemisms that hide its barbarity, and 2) he revealed that abortion's proponents are too embarrassed and uncomfortable to have the conversation without the euphemisms because it makes them look monstrous. In other words, they care more about how they're perceived than anything else, including the wellbeing of innocent, defenseless babies. So they are, in fact, monstrous — and terrible at hiding it. Very well done.

The year is 1950. Your doctor lights a cigarette and tells you smoking is fine. He read it in a study. He is telling the truth about having read it. He does not know, or is not saying, that the study was funded by the tobacco industry. The year is 1958. Your doctor tells you to eat less fat. The evidence is contested. The contestation is not in the public messaging. The food industry has been helpful in clarifying which findings deserve attention. Some researchers who published contradictory data have been quietly defunded. Ancel Keys is on the cover of Time magazine. The year is 1962. Your doctor prescribes thalidomide to your pregnant wife for morning sickness. It has been approved. The FDA gave it the green light in Europe. Twelve thousand children will be born with severe limb malformations before anyone in an official capacity acknowledges the problem. The families are told the drug was safe. The drug was approved. Both of these things remain true. The year is 1972. Your doctor prescribes Valium. Britain is in the grip of a benzodiazepine wave that will last two decades. The dependency risk is known internally. It is not shared. Your doctor is not lying to you. He was not told either. The year is 1999. Your doctor prescribes Vioxx for your arthritis. It is newer than ibuprofen, well-tolerated, and Merck has a study showing it works. Merck also has internal data suggesting it roughly doubles the risk of heart attack. This data will not reach your doctor for four more years. Fifty thousand people are estimated to have died in the interim. Merck eventually settles for 4.85 billion dollars. No criminal charges are brought. The year is 2002. Your doctor prescribes OxyContin. Purdue Pharma trained its sales representatives to tell doctors the addiction risk was less than one percent. That figure came from a letter, not a study. The letter was about patients with terminal cancer on short-term doses in hospital settings. Your doctor is a GP with a patient who has a bad back. Nobody draws a distinction. Nobody is required to. The year is 2008. Your doctor checks your cholesterol. Your LDL is elevated. You are prescribed a statin. Nobody mentions that the number needed to treat for primary prevention is approximately 250. Nobody mentions that the muscle deterioration you'll notice over the next two years is listed as a rare side effect rather than a documented pattern affecting a meaningful percentage of patients. The trial that informed the prescription was funded by the manufacturer. Now it is today. Your doctor has new guidelines. New studies. New consensus. He is confident. He has always been confident. The confidence has never been the problem. The confidence is, in fact, precisely the problem.

Ok, I'm going to explain this simply. Tylenol reduces glutathione. Glutathione is an antioxidant that highly mitigates inflammatory damage. If a mother has an illness during pregnancy, something called maternal immune activation (MIA) can occur in response. This is known to cause deleterious effects to fetal development. This is all well documented and not controversial. If she takes Tylenol during this inflammation to reduce symptoms, it can also cause a reduction in the ability to mitigate the inflammation, which can exacerbate any potential fetal damage. There is a risk to benefit ratio in every medication. In this instance, the risk is fetal damage, and the benefit is reduction in symptoms. The risk outweighs the benefit. Vaccines cause inflammation. That is, in fact, the goal. Create inflammation to generate an immune response. So pregnant women are given vaccines, which causes inflammation, and cause MIA, which potentially harms fetal development, and then are given Tylenol, which simply exacerbates the situation. I really wish people would just look at these things from an empirical perspective and stop politicizing everything. Feel free to look up anything I just said. It's all textbook medical knowledge. For decades, doctors implored pregnant women to take extra care of themselves, avoid all drugs, toxic foods, get adequate rest, reduce workload, etc, because a developing fetal is exceptionally vulnerable. Please stop spreading incorrect information that harms patients.

This should be headline news EVERYWHERE. A Pfizer insider who was former head of toxicology in Europe has just come out and said something that many "conspiracy theorists" suspected. He estimates that 20 000 to 60 000 people in Germany have died from the c*vid vaccine. This was said at a parliamentary enquiry commission in Germany. So why isn't this massive news being reported everywhere? Is the mainstream media that has recieved millions in funding from Bill Gates deliberately covering this up... 🤔

Chris d'Entremont - 23,024 votes Michael Ma - 27,055 votes Matt Jeneroux - 30,343 votes Marilyn Gladu - 26,292 votes We're now at 106,714 Conservative voters disenfranchised by the Prime Minister Carney and the Members of Parliament themselves. And don't tell me this is how our democracy works. In practice, it hasn't worked this way for 50+ years. Those voters reasonably expected to get Conservative MPs and now they're getting Liberals.

Mark Carney could possibly be the first Canadian Prime Minister in our history to achieve a majority government that nobody voted for. When this happens,we no longer have a Democracy.

This floor crossing BS is out of control. If MPs in this country can just change parties whenever they want, then voters truly have no control over who becomes prime minister and runs our government. The whole Canadian system is based on the premise that parties MATTER.

Public Health Agency of Canada took over the Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) on April 1, 2026. The VISP domain now redirects to a federal website that calls it the “Vaccine Impact Assistance Program” and it has scrubbed all payout & injury statistics. Truly next-level.

Wow. They removed all the data. Nothing says "safe and effective" like deleting all the injuries, right? See? Now they can say, "there is no evidence of harm" (because we deleted it all).

New here? Welcome. Here's what we've documented so far: 🔴 $35.8M in taxpayer funds to companies the PM's wife advises 🔴 How Carney has been bleeding the economy since 2009 🔴 Air Canada CEO story connecting 2.1B$ directly to PM's Brookfield. + Much more. All in the Highlights tab. This isn't about Conservative or Liberal. This is about a financial architecture that was built to move public money into private networks — and Canadians deserve to see the receipts. Everything I post is sourced to from official government websites, news outlets and parliamentary records. No speculation, just documentation. The only way this reaches Canadians who need to see it is through you. Legacy media won't cover it. The algorithm will bury it. But screenshots in a group chat, a link sent to a friend, a conversation at the kitchen table — that's how this breaks through. If this work matters to you, the most powerful thing you can do costs nothing — make sure someone who hasn't seen this, does. 🔔Turn on your notifications. We're just getting started. 🇨🇦

This post barely scratches the surface. Let me break this down so every single Canadian understands what’s happening to your money right now. Your Prime Minister is a former central banker. He ran the Bank of Canada. He ran the Bank of England. He co-founded the global framework directing $130 TRILLION toward a new financial system. And right now, he is quietly building the infrastructure to replace how your money works — permanently. Here’s the full picture: (Every claim sourced. All receipts live.)

“The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became the truth” — George Orwell

The more I read this, the more I realize how it is utterly illiterate. How exactly do you decolonize someone’s birthplace? He lived there. No one came in and conquered his house. It’s just a house of a man that exists. These people are exhausting 🙄

To my X followers, I’ve worked with the media for nearly 25 years. For most of that time, the relationship was professional and balanced. But in recent years, something has shifted. I am increasingly concerned about the state of our democracy — particularly how media, in general, are informing Canadians about food policy, food inflation, and economic policy. I now find myself learning more about Canada’s economy and policy changes from American outlets than from Canadian ones. Much of our national coverage feels reactive, shallow, or overly fixated on partisan narratives rather than substantive policy analysis. What troubles me most is the lack of scrutiny applied evenly across governments and institutions. For example, when the Bank of Canada suggested that Ottawa’s counter-tariffs contributed to food inflation, only one major outlet — Bloomberg — gave it meaningful coverage. The grocery benefit program received very little examination regarding how it would be financed. It took days before anyone pressed for clarity. During the latest spike in food inflation, several outlets turned to the same small circle of commentators who dismissed any potential role of federal policy — carbon pricing, GST holidays, counter-tariffs — despite mounting evidence that policy decisions can and do affect food prices. Instead of investigating structural drivers of inflation, much of the coverage focuses on fact-checking opposition rhetoric, even though the opposition has not governed since 2015. Scrutiny should be applied equally — not selectively. Quebec media, while imperfect, appear to have maintained a broader range of debate. In much of the rest of Canada, I see increasing concentration of voices — often from the same region, Ontario, often reflecting similar policy perspectives — and less diversity of thought grounded in empirical research. This isn’t about partisan politics. It’s about accountability, transparency, and healthy democratic discourse. Media are under financial pressure — that’s real. But public trust depends on independence and depth. Subsidy structures, incentives, and newsroom economics all matter. Canada deserves stronger policy journalism — especially on food affordability, supply chains, and economic resilience. We need more data-driven analysis, more intellectual diversity, and more courage to ask uncomfortable questions — regardless of which party is in power. Until that happens, Canadians would be wise to diversify their news sources and think critically about what they’re being told — and what they’re not.

Declassified CIA documents reveal plans from 1952 to control behavior (induce depression, anxiety, lethargy) through chemicals covertly delivered via vaccinations, food, and water. Since 2021, 70% of humanity received a highly neurotoxic agent masquerading as "vaccination". Multiple peer-reviewed studies have now linked the COVID "vaccines" to increased risks of: 1️⃣ Cognitive impairment (+137.7%) 2️⃣ Depression (+68.3%) 3️⃣ Anxiety disorders (+43.9%) 4️⃣ Sleep disorders (+93.4%) 5️⃣ Alzheimer’s (+22.5%) 6️⃣ Ischemic stroke (+44%) 7️⃣ Hemorrhagic stroke (+50%) 8️⃣ Transient ischemic attack (+67%) 9️⃣ Myelitis (+165%) 🔟 Myasthenia gravis (+71%) ⚠️CDC/FDA safety thresholds were breached (PRR ≥ 2 compared to flu shot) for 146 brain, spinal cord, and psychiatric disorders, some of which include: 📈 Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (CJD) — 847× more likely 📈 Brain clots – 3,000× more likely 📈 Dementia – 140× more likely 📈 Suicidal thoughts – 150× more likely 📈 Homicidal ideation – 25× more likely 📈 Psychosis – 440× more likely 📈 Herpes zoster meningitis — 1,200× more likely 📈 Toxic encephalopathy — 157× more likely 📈 Schizophrenia – 315× more likely 📈 Depression – 530× more likely 📈 Brain abscess — 120× more likely 📈 Violent behavior – 80× more likely 📈 Cognitive decline – 115× more likely 📈 Delusions – 50× more likely The mRNA shots disrupt the blood–brain barrier, allowing mRNA, amyloidogenic spike proteins, and pathogens to penetrate the brain and spinal cord — an outcome consistent with the skyrocketing rates of cognitive decline now seen across the world.

@MarkJCarney Guess he's all done focusing on family.